[W:234] Tax Wealth Not Work

[Decypher]

It’s likely that demorats will increase spending and prefer to raise taxes only on a minority of the electorate. From each according to their ability (to pay more taxes), to each according to their need (for more public assistance).

If they can do it without massive deficits, then I don’t have a problem with it.

 

[Decypher]

The party of Marx

“From today, therefore, taxes are abolished! It is high treason to pay taxes. Refusal to pay taxes is the primary duty of the citizen!" - Karl Marx

 

[Gaius46]

It's total bullcrap that exacutives work more hours and they're not unpaid they get huge bonuses and benefits that regular staff can only dream of.
Most times they even get huge payouts if they screw-up and get fired.

This mollycoddling of the rich is beyond a joke at this point.

Execs work more hours - often many more - to GET TO BE execs. No one gets promoted for just doing their job. Most of the C suite and managing director types I've worked with often did 12 hour days every day. And as salaried employees they weren't paid over time.

 

[ALiberalModerate]

If you taxed wealth rather than income, most Americans would end up paying most of their taxes in retirement when all their "wealth" in the forms of retirement savings accounts becomes available to them.

Personally, I would rather have my income taxed and not have to pay taxes on property, personal property and so on. That way, I pay taxes while I work and then when I retire one day, my tax burden goes away.

 

[craig]

The problem is how to address the enormous wealth that has already been accumulated due to decades of low taxes and loopholes. That is going to be a problem forever.

That is another benefit of the wealth tax. It diminishes concentrated and generational wealth that is so damaging to democracy,

 

[AZRWinger]

I take it you think the author of the video has zero economic knowledge.
How about Scandinavian countries who do tax the rich more and have high public spending? Are they all financially illiterate as well?

How about the European experience with taxing the rich.

"In 1990, twelve countries in Europe had a wealth tax. Today, there are only three: Norway, Spain, and Switzerland. According to reports by the OECD and others, there were some clear themes with the policy: it was expensive to administer, it was hard on people with lots of assets but little cash, it distorted saving and investment decisions, it pushed the rich and their money out of the taxing countries—and, perhaps worst of all, it didn't raise much revenue."
Link

But don't worry it will be "different" this time. Who cares if it didn't work, social justice is the thing, right?

 

[AZRWinger]

If you taxed wealth rather than income, most Americans would end up paying most of their taxes in retirement when all their "wealth" in the forms of retirement savings accounts becomes available to them.

Personally, I would rather have my income taxed and not have to pay taxes on property, personal property and so on. That way, I pay taxes while I work and then when I retire one day, my tax burden goes away.

Doesn't work that way. Your SS benefit is taxable. Except for Roth IRA, your withdrawals from your retirement are most likely taxable. You might retire but the tax man doesn't.

Kim Jung Biden is hiring another 80,000 for the IRS to harass you. Just imagine when everything you own must be reported and appraised by the Federal government so it can be taxed.

 

[Eriech]

“From today, therefore, taxes are abolished! It is high treason to pay taxes. Refusal to pay taxes is the primary duty of the citizen!" - Karl Marx

Some ideological disphoria......

 

[iguanaman]

How about the European experience with taxing the rich.

"In 1990, twelve countries in Europe had a wealth tax. Today, there are only three: Norway, Spain, and Switzerland. According to reports by the OECD and others, there were some clear themes with the policy: it was expensive to administer, it was hard on people with lots of assets but little cash, it distorted saving and investment decisions, it pushed the rich and their money out of the taxing countries—and, perhaps worst of all, it didn't raise much revenue."
Link

But don't worry it will be "different" this time. Who cares if it didn't work, social justice is the thing, right?

I thought we were not like Europe....Warren's proposed wealth tax was designed with Europe's failures in mind. It is not the same at all and would likely work far better.

UC Berkeley economist Gabriel Zucman, whose research helped put wealth inequality back on the American policy agenda, played a part in designing Warren's wealth tax. He says it was designed explicitly with European failures in mind.

He argues the Warren plan is "very different than any wealth tax that has existed anywhere in the world." Unlike in the European Union, it's impossible to freely move to another country or state to escape national taxes. Existing U.S. law also taxes citizens wherever they are, so even if they do sail to a tax haven in the Caribbean, they're still on the hook. On top of that, Warren's plan includes an "exit tax," which would confiscate 40 percent of all a person's wealth over $50 million if they renounce their citizenship.

Warren's tax is also only limited to the super rich, whereas in Europe the threshold was low enough to also hit the sort-of rich. This higher threshold helps it avoid problems like someone having a family business that makes them look rich on paper but, in fact, they're short on the cash needed to pay the tax.

https://www.npr.org/sections/money/...s-such-a-good-idea-why-did-europe-kill-theirs

 

[Fishking]

So you know the secret. Would you tell us please.

You can't tax what doesn't exist. Most the people that are very wealthy have their wealth in assets, like stocks. You want to have them liquidate the stocks and tank a company's value? Do they have to sell their house to pay the taxes on it?

 

[AZRWinger]

I thought we were not like Europe....Warren's proposed wealth tax was designed with Europe's failures in mind. It is not the same at all and would likely work far better.

UC Berkeley economist Gabriel Zucman, whose research helped put wealth inequality back on the American policy agenda, played a part in designing Warren's wealth tax. He says it was designed explicitly with European failures in mind.

He argues the Warren plan is "very different than any wealth tax that has existed anywhere in the world." Unlike in the European Union, it's impossible to freely move to another country or state to escape national taxes. Existing U.S. law also taxes citizens wherever they are, so even if they do sail to a tax haven in the Caribbean, they're still on the hook. On top of that, Warren's plan includes an "exit tax," which would confiscate 40 percent of all a person's wealth over $50 million if they renounce their citizenship.

Warren's tax is also only limited to the super rich, whereas in Europe the threshold was low enough to also hit the sort-of rich. This higher threshold helps it avoid problems like someone having a family business that makes them look rich on paper but, in fact, they're short on the cash needed to pay the tax.

https://www.npr.org/sections/money/...s-such-a-good-idea-why-did-europe-kill-theirs

Well a Berkeley professor! Can't fail, new and different. Operators are standing by.

As soon as the new success tax looks like it's going to pass, wave bye bye to a tsunami of capital going overseas and a profound reduction in foreign investment in the US. New and different doesn't mean better or in this case functional.

How convenient Warren's tax threshold excludes her family fortune. That's the advantage of writing the bill tax someone else.

 

[craig]

You can't tax what doesn't exist. Most the people that are very wealthy have their wealth in assets, like stocks. You want to have them liquidate the stocks and tank a company's value? Do they have to sell their house to pay the taxes on it?

That is all happening now. All taxes are paid with wealth. The very rich pay taxes with a miniscule portion of their wealth. Most everyone else pay taxes with most or all of their wealth. That is why we need a million dollar exclusion.

 

[iguanaman]

You can't tax what doesn't exist. Most the people that are very wealthy have their wealth in assets, like stocks. You want to have them liquidate the stocks and tank a company's value? Do they have to sell their house to pay the taxes on it?

Warren's tax would only affect households with assets over $50 million. Are you saying that these people (most with 100's of millions at least) have nothing in cash? That is absurd.

Warren calls the policy her "Ultra-Millionaire Tax." It would impose a 2% federal tax on every dollar of a person's net worth over $50 million and an additional 1% tax on every dollar in net worth over $1 billion. Economists estimate it would hit the 75,000 richest households and raise $2.75 trillion over ten years.

https://www.npr.org/sections/money/...s-such-a-good-idea-why-did-europe-kill-theirs

 

[Fishking]

Warren's tax would only affect households with assets over $50 million. Are you saying that these people (most with 100's of millions at least) have nothing in cash? That is absurd.

Warren calls the policy her "Ultra-Millionaire Tax." It would impose a 2% federal tax on every dollar of a person's net worth over $50 million and an additional 1% tax on every dollar in net worth over $1 billion. Economists estimate it would hit the 75,000 richest households and raise $2.75 trillion over ten years.

https://www.npr.org/sections/money/...s-such-a-good-idea-why-did-europe-kill-theirs

I didn't say they had no cash, just not on the level of being able to pay taxes on their entire wealth. Further, you'll just have rich people moving their assets overseas.

 

[iguanaman]

I didn't say they had no cash, just not on the level of being able to pay taxes on their entire wealth. Further, you'll just have rich people moving their assets overseas.

That is not really possible for Americans unless they renounce their citizenship and Warren has that covered too. Or they could just pay the tax and still be very very wealthy.

 

[Peter]

You can't tax what doesn't exist. Most the people that are very wealthy have their wealth in assets, like stocks. You want to have them liquidate the stocks and tank a company's value? Do they have to sell their house to pay the taxes on it?

Are you trying to claim if a handful of super rich sell their stocks that for some reason nobody would buy them?
If Bill Gates tried to sell all his stock in Microsoft nobody would buy them?
Really?

 

[iguanaman]

Are you trying to claim if a handful of super rich sell their stocks that for some reason nobody would buy them?
If Bill Gates tried to sell all his stock in Microsoft nobody would buy them?
Really?

He believes people with assets of 50 to 100's of millions of $ are short on cash and it would be burden to come up with the cash for a wealth tax.

 

[ALiberalModerate]

Doesn't work that way. Your SS benefit is taxable. Except for Roth IRA, your withdrawals from your retirement are most likely taxable. You might retire but the tax man doesn't.

Kim Jung Biden is hiring another 80,000 for the IRS to harass you. Just imagine when everything you own must be reported and appraised by the Federal government so it can be taxed.

I pay my taxes, so I am not concerned. My point was that out of all taxes, I would just assume my income was taxed sufficient enough that I didn't have to pay other taxes. I don't like property, personal property, and sales taxes.

If wealth was taxed instead of income, taxes on retirement investments would have to cripplingly high to make up the difference.

 

[Bullseye]

In theory I prefer to tax wealth over income.

In practice this would be difficult to enforce. The rich would just stash their wealth in the Cayman Islands.

The compromise is a truly progressive income tax that doesn't give all these exceptions to billionaires.

We already have that. 40-50 of workers pay no federal income tax while the top 10% of earners pay around 50% of total tax.

 

[8085]

If the tax rate was 200% Joe Biden would still find a way to get rid of it all and get nothing useful in return.

 

[Fishking]

Are you trying to claim if a handful of super rich sell their stocks that for some reason nobody would buy them?
If Bill Gates tried to sell all his stock in Microsoft nobody would buy them?
Really?

If a bunch of stocks get sold the price of them drops.

 

[Peter]

If a bunch of stocks get sold the price of them drops.

Not always and who says they all have to be sold at the same time?
They could be sold in batches spread over a year.

 

[Peacenik]

It's pretty amazing that they can complain about tax avoidance and at the same time cut the jobs of the people employed to fight against tax avoidance.

That requires a certain level of denial to do that hypocritical Republican thing.

 

[ttwtt78640]

It's pretty amazing that they can complain about tax avoidance and at the same time cut the jobs of the people employed to fight against tax avoidance.

IMHO, the main driver of tax avoidance is the ridiculous complexity of the (80K pages of?) the FIT laws. There is also the matter of the return on investment in the IRS auditing (ensuring compliance) process. Having the IRS audit (examine in detail) the most complex returns (generally those of “the rich”) is less likely to reveal ‘errors’ (tax avoidance) than audits of less complex, generally those with average to slightly above average (claimed) income, returns per man hour of IRS effort involved.

 

[Peter]

IMHO, the main driver of tax avoidance is the ridiculous complexity of the (80K pages of?) the FIT laws. There is also the matter of the return on investment in the IRS auditing (ensuring compliance) process. Having the IRS audit (examine in detail) the most complex returns (generally those of “the rich”) is less likely to reveal ‘errors’ (tax avoidance) than audits of less complex, generally those with average to slightly above average (claimed) income, returns per man hour of IRS effort involved.

All having less IRS staff will achieve is allowing more super rich to get away with massive tax avoidance.
The IRS won't have the staff to go after them and end up only focusing on the smaller cases they can manage so ending up disproportionately affecting the poor and middle class.